On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org> wrote: > At this point, I would like to open this document for soliciting as > wide a feedback as possible. I would like to especially request > attention of the ASF board members who asked for this type of > a document to be available.
As a director, I still don't think the board needs to be involved in a pTLP's "graduation". As far as I'm concerned, any "provisional" status is self-imposed by the PMC and can be removed at its pleasure. >From the board's perspective it's either an ASF project or it's not, there's not a useful middle ground. As a project it needs to provide reports, release according to accepted standards, operate openly, etc. It may be a young project, with a PMC dominated by old-timers who aren't responsible for much of the contribution, but I don't see why that requires a new formal status any more than we need a formal status for old, slow-moving projects that rarely release. Put directly, what does a pTLP's "graduation" change from the board's perspective? How should it change the way we review the project's reports, etc.? In short, why should we care about this label? If a PMC wishes to call itself "blue" that's fine too, but we don't need a resolution when it decides to call itself "purple". Doug --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
